• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

California takes a step backwards!

Status
Not open for further replies.
SBrad001 said:
Yes it is a word, and yes she is pure concentrated EVIL and she most be stopped. . .
Click to expand...

Oh, did I mention I'm a democrat. Really, I am, and I hate her. So does my wife for that matter.
 
SanDiegoXJ said:
In the case of marriage, it represents a religous ceremony. The church doesn't formally recognize a gay marriage. End of story.
Click to expand...

Which religion? What church?
You gotta see the big picture. Dont limit yourself to the "big" religions There are a ton of religions and a ton of churches that except gays. Im sure that someplace they even have their own that we (straight) arent allowed in.

What has irritated me is that in Maryland, where I used to live, I carried health insurance through my job and I was living in my moms basement. She was retired and had her own insurance which cost her alot$$$$$. Maryland didnt recognize gay marriage so my insurance company started a policy that "live in partners" (no specific mention of marriage, sex or orientation) could be covered. So when I tried to get my mom covered, they wouldn't do it. Now theres something seriously wrong with our society when a "live in partner" can be covered, but not your own flesh and blood. I've lost alot of respect for those who make the decisions.
 
Last edited:
buschwhaked said:
She also voted for the invasion of Iraq, had a shot and a beer, and developed some sort of accent meant to appeal to "the people." She is the worst political panderer (is that a word?) one could imagine.
Click to expand...

I was actually refering to Bill Clinton. He signed DOMA when he was President.
 
SBrad001 said:
Seriously, if you can only validate your marriage by telling other people that they can't get married then something's seriously out of whack.
Click to expand...

Agreed and...

BooHoo to you crybabies... manly men that you consider yourselves easily intimidated by roving bands of pillaging butt pirates.

The same people that care about fags getting married are the same folk that honestly believe Jesus was a white guy or that the holocaust never happened... easily impressed and backwards.

walk upright much?

as long as they aren't hurting anyone, let them suffer like the rest of us.

Too bad you fawkers can't build a wall or deport them huh? (unless they're gay wetbacks of course)

buncha homophobes you are.

the voters in CA voted to ban gay marriage but couldn't vote to save your gun rights?

Your priorities are askew.

Enjoy the rainbow stampede headed your way.

:D
 
Last edited:
I really can't see anything good coming from mainstreaming aberrant behavior. And no I'm not a homophobe, I really don't give a darn, as long as they keep there hands to themselves and/or don't get too obnoxious.
 
8Mud said:
I really can't see anything good coming from mainstreaming aberrant behavior.
Click to expand...

Would that include smoking pot???;)
 
Ironmen77 said:
Will all the other states be able to ignore the "Full Faith & Credit Clause"? If not, did they not just create a law for us all?

http://www.answers.com/topic/full-faith-and-credit-clause?cat=biz-fin
Click to expand...

This is one case where Answers.com dropped the ball - I think they're referring to the "Privileges and Immunities" clause, wherein a citizen entitled to certain priviliges and immunities in one state shall enjoy them in all states.

Or I could have my wires crossed again. It just seems to me that you hear the phrase "full faith and credit" more in association with economic policy than with political continuity.

Of course, we could invoke P&I and use that to overturn the Class III/Title Two bans in various states, and then we only really have to worry about F Troop. As well as other state and local laws that are useless or that we don't like (viz. "Municipal Code." There's an ersatz batch of horseradish... And it's pretty much different in every damned city!)

If California wants to declare itself a sovereign country, let me get out of here first. Then, they can go to war with Mexico all they want (and lose!) and that should satisfy New Aztlan and the Reconquistas.

I honestly think California is about at the point where it could be split into four minor countries anyhow - North Caliphate, South Caliphate, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. ("Caliphate" is the root word from which "California" is derived...)

You know, for people who style themselves as "rugged individualists," I see them placidly putting up with the sort of thing that would cause riots back home. HOAs? We'd run them out on a rail. Traffic jams twice daily? Not bloody likely. Maybe if there were a concert or a game, but that's about it. Municipal Codes? There might be some enhancement to building codes, but none of this "It's your property and we can tell you what to do with it" rot.

I style myself more "Libertarian" than anything else. The limitations of government should be the preservation of individual rights (not to the point where you can cause willful harm to others,) defense of the body politic as a whole against threats from without (the "deer peepul" should be able to defend themselves against threats from within - it's more efficient that way,) and the determination of fiscal policy (without paying themselves) and the provision of social welfare - limited to disability, retirement, and short-term unemployment.

And "public servants" should not be paid more than a stipend. And they shouldn't be eligible for retirement (it ain't a damned career. You want a career? Enlist.)

And we can dismantle all these petty little quasi-fiefdoms that these departments end up with while we're about it. Make everyone write a paper defending their position, the position above them, and the position below them. Review and cut out the deadwood.
 
Trail-Axe said:
...

They over-turned a VOTER APPROVED state law that says marriage can only be between a man and a woman. So much for our democracy, instead of a people approved way of governing, we now have a type of monarchy that rules and legislates its own ideas from the bench, regardless of what the majority of the good people who live here vote for. Makes me want to throw up!

...
Click to expand...

Well lets just color you cluless.

What I read above is that you are unhappy because a perverted incarnation of the Howard Jarvis iniative gave you the power to legislate by ballot when you didn't think the folks you pay taxes to represent you are not doing what YOU want them to do, then cry about it when then normal course of legislation takes places, sometimes nullifing your participation in a waste of taxpayer money, and worse, thinking that this is some "normal" course of democracy in this country and start spewing monarchy, majority, and other third grade level idioticy. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

You do not make laws at the federal level by ballot iniative. But, apparently, some states think it's a good idea. I always asked, why the hell even have a State legislature then if we are going to do things this way?

I see a ballot iniative, I vote "NO" with a very few exceptions. Shouldn't be my job to spend 6 months researching every piece of proposed legislation the special interest sector comes up with. No reasonable person can do it. I've tried many times... the deck is stacked against you if you are not a lawyer.

You're probably the type that falls for the old election time saw about not being a patsy for the "Special Interest" groups. You know, that one that candidates throw out there ad nausum during election time. Well, take a look at your ballot measure record. You stupid fuckers are the prefered henchmen for them if they have any chance in hell of getting the signatures. Saves them a ton of money too.

I always ask the signature getters how much they're gonna pay me for my signature...

See, 99% of the population will vote on emotion and ignorance. You never read the fine print, and if you do, you probably accept it as scripture. Never mind that it takes teams of lawyers in most cases to figure out what the far reaching effects of any piece of legislation might have. So what do you get? Whola, another dumbassed piece of legislation that will come back and screw you in most cases. Remember the power deregulation thing? Look how that one turned out. Sometimes they come back in a big way like that one.

Take a good look at all these ballot iniatives... How are they presented... That's right, straight at your emotions, then cover with misleading or incomplete information. Get out there and vote!

I say the courts did us a favor on this one. Now I can see from the whiners exactly who you are... The voters of emotion and ignorance. Do us all a favor, stop voting unless you are willing to do what a congressman and their staff would have to do. Its a responsibility, live up to it, if you can't, get out of the legislation business, you shouldn't be there, you can't do the job, you're not qualified, and the rest of us can't recall your dumb asses.

:D

--ron
 
SBrad001 said:
I do that too along with, 'this will improve reliability and gas mileage'. I think she's catching on. . .. :D
Click to expand...

DAMN....what a great line....:doh:
 
my 1.5 cents...

As was discussed in an earlier thread regarding some other legal/illegal things...

Life...Liberty...Pursuit of Happiness. If a fag's pursuit of happiness includes a civil union and/or marriage...so be it. It doesnt affect me if two fags or two lesbos walking down the street are legally married or not. If it's one's belief that they will forever burn in hell, well, ok, that just makes that line shorter (or longer) in getting wherever you're going. Figuratively speaking of course.

Two random people being married does not affect me. Or you. Or really any of us. Sure, they can parade and flaunt and be all proud that they finally have the right to "express themselves" even more, and garner more attention b/c mommy and daddy didnt love them enough when they were kids....but in all truth....that piece of paper they can now wave around doesn't change anything in my life.....

They're still just a bunch of queers...no, I'm not a homophobe - I'm not afraid of them. It just makes me vomit to see their PDA, they're disgusting. Ah well, what can you do....some people will do whatever they can when they're starved for attention...
 
Last edited:
I concur...I've always wanted to go back to my "native" AZ...Land where queers can't marry ;) and good law-abiding citizens can go just about anywhere they want with a gun on their hips!:D

And Mike (SanDiegoXJ) the more I read your posts the more I like ya! Your anal (no pun intended) about your grammar and English just I am. Reminds of a friend of mine from the Marine Corps, if you ended a sentence with a preposition he'd get all kinds of pissed and correct you. If he did it himself on accident, he'd have to stop, correct himself and then regather his thoughts before continuing on...:D
 
Trail-Axe said:
Citing a 1948 California Supreme Court decision that overturned a ban on interracial marriages, the justices struck down the state's 1977 one-man, one-woman marriage law...
Click to expand...

Did they just open the door for polygamy?

I have always thought it would be the logical next step.

Marriages between siblings or any other close relatives (of consenting age at least) could easily follow as well...
 
Gil BullyKatz said:
Agreed and...

BooHoo to you crybabies... manly men that you consider yourselves easily intimidated by roving bands of pillaging butt pirates.

The same people that care about fags getting married are the same folk that honestly believe Jesus was a white guy or that the holocaust never happened... easily impressed and backwards.

walk upright much?

as long as they aren't hurting anyone, let them suffer like the rest of us.

Too bad you fawkers can't build a wall or deport them huh? (unless they're gay wetbacks of course)

buncha homophobes you are.

the voters in CA voted to ban gay marriage but couldn't vote to save your gun rights?

Your priorities are askew.

Enjoy the rainbow stampede headed your way.

:D
Click to expand...
I'm against the idea of gay marriage but I know Jesus was a darky, much like myself, just maybe not as dark. :D Only extremist Muslims, largely Iranian based on their president, believe the Holocaust never happened. Based on your reaction to people's opinions that gays are wrong, one would almost conclude you were gay yourself, if we didn't already know better...;)

I will agree that the majority of Californians are seriously skewed though. Too much else stupid in this state...legal abortions for 13 yr olds without parental knowledge or consent? Come on, parents have to approve of their minor daughters getting their wisdom teeth pulled!
 
JNickel101 said:
my 1.5 cents...

As was discussed in an earlier thread regarding some other legal/illegal things...

Life...Liberty...Pursuit of Happiness. If a fag's pursuit of happiness includes a civil union and/or marriage...so be it. It doesnt affect me if two fags or two lesbos walking down the street are legally married or not. If it's one's belief that they will forever burn in hell, well, ok, that just makes that line shorter (or longer) in getting wherever you're going. Figuratively speaking of course.

Two random people being married does not affect me. Or you. Or really any of us. Sure, they can parade and flaunt and be all proud that they finally have the right to "express themselves" even more, and garner more attention b/c mommy and daddy didnt love them enough when they were kids....but in all truth....that piece of paper they can now wave around doesn't change anything in my life.....

They're still just a bunch of queers...no, I'm not a homophobe - I'm not afraid of them. It just makes me vomit to see their PDA, they're disgusting. Ah well, what can you do....some people will do whatever they can when they're starved for attention...
Click to expand...


I'm not going to weigh in much on this thread, but have one thing to ponder, because like you I find some things difficult to watch, but then I stopped and thought:

why should my comfort level be the rule that decides how other people live their lives?

You may think you're not a homophobe, but your language says otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top